Going through this article let me look for why Wikipedia articles are junk:
- Khruschev, Stalin, Trotskyist, E. P. Thompson, Antonio Gramsci, Tariq Ali - this article is about personalities, not the mass movement of the New Left. The millions of people in the new left are not important, what Tariq Ali thought, said and did is important. This is the kind of thinking you find from the commissars on corporate television, or on Wikipedia, I don't see why it has to infect here.
- Khruschev's 1956 speech is called "secret". It was so secret, the whole world knew about it right after he made it. I don't know why his speech is being called by its Cold War propaganda name. Also, this sentence is poor grammar, it makes it sound like Khruschev was denouncing the USSR's relationship with Hungary. Also, the Soviet Union is said to have invaded Hungary in 1956, despite the fact that Soviet troops were already in Hungary in 1956 prior to the supposed invasion in October. Also, the Hungarian government asked the troops to come in. That event was a very complex one, to call it the Soviet invasion of Hungary is stepping down the Wikipedia road of viewing it more from the US Cold War point of view. That event was very complex and should be handled delicately, I think.
- Again with the cult of personality (which Wikipedia always claims the left is enamored of, when the opposite is true), Tom Hayden is called the author of the Port Huron Statement. While it is true he was the principal author, it was a collectively written document, an important point which is left out.
There are also other things in the article that are suffuse with Wikipedia-ness. Lance Murdoch 04:09, 23 May 2005 (UTC)